DailyFinance.comhttp://www.dailyfinance.comDailyFinance.comhttp://o.aolcdn.com/os/df/2013/img/2-dailyfinance_logo_m.pngDailyFinance.comhttp://www.dailyfinance.comen-usCopyright 2015 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/Forget Fulfillment, Young Workers Want Financial Stabilityhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/28/forget-fulfillment-young-workers-want-financial-stability/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/28/forget-fulfillment-young-workers-want-financial-stability/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/28/forget-fulfillment-young-workers-want-financial-stability/#commentsFiled under: Recession, Careers, Labor, Job Market, CollegeAlamy
If experience is a great teacher, then the Great Recession must be up for an educator of the year award. After living through a global financial crisis and the lingering aftermath, current or recent college students would rather opt for a regular paycheck than following their occupational dream, according to a recent survey from workforce recruitment firm Adecco Staffing.

The survey of 1,001 Millennial and Gen-Z (born after 1995) students and recent graduates found that the ability to find a job was the single biggest concern for 32 percent of all respondents, even though 79 percent thought that they would have a job within five months of graduation. Forty-two percent thought that they'd have a job in less than three months.The top aspiration for students was, at 31 percent, to become financially stable in the next 10 years. Financial stability was a top-three pick for 69 percent of the respondents. Following that was the desire to land a dream job, which was the top interest for 28 percent of respondents overall, with 32 percent of Gen-Z'ers and 24 percent of millennials expressing that interest.

In getting a first job, 36 percent put career growth as their top priority, compared to fulfilling work and stability, at 19 percent each. Only 6 percent though getting the highest salary was most important, even though 73 percent expected to make up to $55,000 a year on a first job.

"A trend we're seeing emerge is that students -- particularly the older ones -- who felt or witnessed the impact of the recession are more likely to prioritize career growth and stability in their job search," Adecco Staffing USA President Joyce Russell said in a statement.

Getting those jobs may be tough, however, as 42 percent will spend 5 hours or more on social media during spring break and 64 percent expect to spend the same amount of time streaming video. Only 16 percent plan to put 5 hours or more into a job search during that time. Thirty-one percent rely on online job boards while 29 percent depend on the school's career center.

The Millennial and Gen-Z respondents differed when it came to the cost of school. Twenty-one percent of Gen-Z students ranked the cost of college as their greatest worry. Only 13 percent of millennials felt the same.

There were some interesting differences between the genders. Women, at 38 percent, had travel as a top-three aspiration, compared to 26 percent of men. And 28 percent of men said that starting a family was a top priority, while only 20 percent of women said the same. However, 36 percent of all respondents had getting married as a top-three aspiration.

]]>adecco staffingcollegecollege graduateseconomyeducationemploymentfirst jobgeneration zjob marketjobsmillennialsErik ShermanTue, 28 Apr 2015 12:15:00 ESTNeiman Marcus Sells Real Fur as Fake, Complaint to FTC Sayshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/15/neiman-marcus-mislabels-fur-complaint-says/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/15/neiman-marcus-mislabels-fur-complaint-says/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/15/neiman-marcus-mislabels-fur-complaint-says/#commentsFiled under: Amazon.com, Retail, Consumer Ally, Consumer IssuesDavid Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Looking for a woman's boot with a faux fur trim? Neiman Marcus had a model called the Taryn Rose, at least in March, for $213, according to a screen grab provided by the Humane Society of the U.S. Just one problem: The faux fur was anything but. The boot came with a label that indicated the trim as "dyed and treated real fur from rabbit," according to an image sent to DailyFinance from the society.

The purchase was the latest in a series of market checks that the organization conducts. Earlier this year, Amazon was caught treating real fur as fake, as DailyFinance reported. Now the online operations of upscale retailer Neiman Marcus have come under the spotlight. The organization this week filed a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, claiming the company has violated a consent order it earlier entered into with the FTC over previous incorrect labeling of real fur as faux.

The HSUS has amassed evidence that Neiman Marcus has recently sold fur garments that are falsely and misleadingly advertised and labeled as faux fur when, in fact, the garments include real animal fur. This evidence indicates that Neiman Marcus engaged in these practices after the date of entry of the [previous] Consent Order, which "permanently restrained and enjoined" Neiman Marcus from ... "falsely or deceptively advertising any fur product by misrepresenting...[t]hat the fur in any fur product is faux or fake."

DailyFinance requested an interview with Neiman Marcus but did not receive a response before publication.

HSUS had delayed in publicizing Amazon's issue to give the retailer "ample opportunity to rectify the problem and demonstration how they intended to prevent such misrepresentation in the future." There was no such delay in this case between allegedly detecting the problem and going to the FTC.

Long History Between Society and Neiman Marcus

"Neiman Marcus is such a notoriously bad actor when it comes to selling real fur as faux that as this point we go straight to the Federal Trade Commission," Pierre Grzybowski, research and enforcement manager of the society's fur-free campaign, told DailyFinance. According to Grzybowski, the society's interactions with Neiman Marcus go back to at least 2007 and cover a series of incidents in which the retailer supposedly represented real fur as fake.

Grzybowski said that one reason manufacturers substitute real fur for fake is cost. "Animal fur trim especially, can easily cost less to the manufacturer than high-quality faux fur," he said. "It's impossible for us to say in any given instance why real fur is being misrepresented as faux fur, but generally speaking it's likely a combination of some intentional misrepresentation, especially at the manufacturing level, and a great deal of sloppy or non-existent quality control at the retail level."

There are multiple problems with selling real fur as faux. One is that many people under principle object to purchasing products with fur. Another is the potential for an allergic reaction.

]]>amazonfake furfaux furFederal Trade CommissionftcHumane Societyneiman marcusreal furErik ShermanWed, 15 Apr 2015 14:37:00 ESTComcast Wouldn't Cancel Service After House Burned Downhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/10/comcast-wouldnt-cancel-service-after-house-burned-down/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/10/comcast-wouldnt-cancel-service-after-house-burned-down/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/10/comcast-wouldnt-cancel-service-after-house-burned-down/#commentsFiled under: Media, Consumer Ally, Telecommunications, Consumer IssuesTim Boyle/Getty Images
April Fool's pranks can be unpleasant for the recipient. But there was nothing funny at all when the house of St. Paul, Minnesota, retired truck driver Jimmy Ware went up in flames on April 1. As the St. Paul Pioneer Press reported, he had been drinking a beer when he got the news. Ware drove to the house, which had been owned by his parents before him, turned around and headed back to the bar.

"I couldn't stand looking at it no more," the 66-year-old told the news organization. "Lost my checkbook. Lost everything." A downed power wire ignited dried vegetation, and the flame spread to take his home. Ware had no insurance on the building and was reluctant to ask help of anyone.

Apparently Comcast was more than willing not to offer any. It took a week of calling before the company would cancel Ware's cable television service, according to the Pioneer Press.

Ware's daughter, Jessica Schmidt, was trying to help her father piece his life and deal with important basics, like finding a place to live and rebuilding his life. Canceling cable service should have been a quick task, except that it wasn't.

When Schmidt called Comcast, she was told that she needed the account number to cancel. That was gone, along with every other record and belonging that Ware once had. Her father got on the phone and gave the company the last four digits of his Social Security number, but that apparently wasn't enough.

Corporate Policy

Comcast's policy had been put into place to protect privacy and keep one person from canceling another's service. But sometimes reality doesn't work by corporate rules.

"I've said to Comcast, 'Here's your choice, disconnect the service or send someone out to fix the cable, because it's not working,'" Schmidt said to the Pioneer Press. "The [Comcast] guy said, 'That doesn't make sense, because the house burned down.' I said, 'Exactly, shut the service off.'"

And still they didn't, though finally, at the end of what must have been a horrific week, Comcast relented, saying that customer service personnel had mishandled the matter. Not only did the company finally cut off service, backdated to the fire, but it said it wouldn't charge Ware for the equipment that was likely a puddle somewhere.

]]>cable companycomcastConsumer Allycustomer satisfactioncustomer serviceworst customer serviceErik ShermanFri, 10 Apr 2015 10:39:00 ESTStudents Entering College Get a 'D' In Financial Literacyhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/07/students-entering-college-weak-financial-literacy/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/07/students-entering-college-weak-financial-literacy/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/04/07/students-entering-college-weak-financial-literacy/#commentsFiled under: Student Loans, College, Education, Financial EducationHero Images
Reading, writing, and arithmetic are fine, but there's a life basic that many college lack: financial literacy, according to "Money Matters on Campus," a report from financial aid company Higher One and education technology company EverFi. That's a growing problem, as the trend of increased levels of loans taken to pay for college means that graduating students will face greater financial pressures without necessarily having the skills to manage them.

The survey of 42,000 first-year college students in four-year and two-year schools across the U.S. covered such topics as banking, savings, credit cards and school loans. It was the latest in an annual series that started in 2012.

Although respondents have increased experience with credit cards, bank accounts and student loans compared to previous years, such "responsible planning behaviors" as budgeting and reviewing accounts decreased. In addition, increased levels of loans were matched by fewer plans of how to pay them back. Students entering two-year colleges typically had more responsible financial behaviors than those going into four-year colleges. On the whole, the percentage of students reporting responsible behaviors declined from 2012 to 2014, whether paying bills on time, reviewing bills, paying off credit cards, following budgets to limit spending or balancing checkbooks.

Money Matters on Campus
Overall, students who had entered two-year colleges showed more responsible behavior than those in four-year schools. For example, only 25 percent of four-year students kept receipts, while 53 percent of two-year students did. Eighty-three percent of two-year students checked account balances, compared to 62 percent of four-year students. While 60 percent of two-year students used personal financial budgets, only 39 percent of four-year students did.

Money Matters on Campus
Relatively few students receive formal training in financial literacy. Only 34 percent of four-year students took a high school course in the subject. For two-year students, the amount was 24 percent.

To some degree or other, most students entering college -- and adulthood -- over the years have had a bit of a shock, as they had to be far more active in managing their affairs than before. But the cost of school is hitting many hard. Tuition, costs of books and supplies, getting enough financial aid and having sufficient money to last a semester are significant causes of stress for many.

"All college students are stressed financially, regardless of their experience or knowledge or behaviors," Mary Johnson, vice president of financial literacy and student aid policy at Higher One, told MarketWatch.com. "The one area that seemed to make it worse is the level of student loans."

For good reason, too. Sixty-three percent of four-year students and 44 percent of two-year students taking part in the study reported having school loans. A little more than half of the latter had less than $10,000 in loans, compared to 25 percent of four-year students. And 22 percent of four-year students had more than $40,000 in loans, while only 5 percent of two-year students did.

But the basic technology, which is widely used throughout the world, is being introduced with a significant flaw in the U.S., as a Walmart (WMT) executive said at a conference, according to CNNMoney. The cut corner will turn the new implementations into a "joke," said Mike Cook, assistant treasurer and senior vice president at the company. The problem is banks that enable the chip technology will only require signatures, not the input of a PIN code.

"Signature is worthless as a form of authentication," Cook said during his presentation, as quoted by CNNMoney. "If you look at the Target and Home Depot breaches ... not a single PIN debit card needed to be reissued in those breaches. The card number was worthless to the individual thief and fraudsters, because they didn't know the PIN."

PINs, not Signatures

Using signatures instead of PINs, criminals could still commit fraud because verifying someone's signature from a central source is next to impossible. The use of PIN codes with chip cards in Europe has significantly decreased both counterfeit and stolen card fraud there, according to Mercator Advisory Group. But U.S. retailers have largely pushed for a chip and signature system, making the implementation "markedly different."

In the 1990s, when chip cards were first introduced, telecommunications costs in Europe were much higher than in the U.S. It meant retailers couldn't afford to process all credit card transactions online, as Mercator explained. Instead, they opted for a PIN system that would let them verify identity more securely through existing separate payment systems.

To add a PIN system in the U.S. now would force the banks and payment systems to do additional data processing, which would require expensive system upgrades and more data being moved during transactions. In addition, the banks don't want to add a hurdle to using credit cards. They make a lot of money from credit card fees and interest on accumulated balances. Executives are worried that if they make their cards less convenient to use, consumers might instead opt for cards from other banks.

The reaction is similar to one among retailers. Even as massive data losses -- whether at a Target (TGT), Home Depot (HD) or Sony (SNE) -- that can lead to identity theft and credit card fraud have become a regular experience, companies haven't significantly changed how they do business. It turns out that have retailers have little incentive to improve security, as CBS MoneyWatch reported, because the losses they face are tiny in the context of their annual sales. And, like the banks, they too worry that inconvenience might drive people to spend less, and push sales revenue down.

]]>chip and pincomputer chipscredit card chipdata breachhome depot data breachpinsonytarget data breachtechnologywalmartErik ShermanMon, 06 Apr 2015 15:55:00 ESTDog Trainer Says 'Bad Customer,' Sues for $65K Over Reviewshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/03/27/dog-trainer-says-bad-customer-sues-for-65k-over-reviews/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/03/27/dog-trainer-says-bad-customer-sues-for-65k-over-reviews/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/03/27/dog-trainer-says-bad-customer-sues-for-65k-over-reviews/#commentsFiled under: Scandals and Lawsuits, Consumer Issues, PetsArterra Picture Library/Alamy
Review sites have given consumers a way to amplify their voices and make an impact on a company's business -- for good or bad. For Virginia resident Jennifer Ujimori, bad reviews on Yelp and Angie's List turned into a terrible experience, as the owner of obedience school Dog Tranquility filed a $65,000 defamation lawsuit against her, according to the Washington Post.

The dispute has become a battle between customer and business owner, with each claiming the ethical high ground. It also highlights a growing area of tension in commerce. Customers displeased with services or products take to social media to complain about the companies they did business with. Small business owners get angry, often claiming that the consumers are unreasonably and that the complaints greatly damage their reputations and cause significant financial loss. But getting into a fight can hurt the company even more.

Ujimori told the Post that in January she took her 14-week-old, 4-pound dog Yuki to a $175 obedience class. But the other dogs in the class were big and Yuki was in a gated-off area by herself. Ujimori said that she asked for a prorated refund but was refused.

"For me, it's a matter of principle and public interest," Ujimori told the Post. "People should be free to express their feelings about their service providers. Companies using the legal system to silence their critics has a chilling effect on First Amendment rights."

School's Owner Says What She Offered

The Post reported that Colleen Dermott, owner of Dog Tranquility, claimed in her lawsuit that she had sent emails to Ujimori that the group of dogs would be mixed and that there small dogs could be put into an optional gated area. Dermott also claimed that the contract stated there would be no refunds.

Dermott also told the Post that she tried to satisfy Ujimori, including offering a credit for a future class. "It had a significant impact in that I'm a small-business owner," Dermott said to the Post. "I have to rely on these review sites as a major source of advertising."

But the suit seems to have backfired on Dermott, if a look at her Yelp page is any indication. Dog Tranquility has 53 reviews now and an overall rating of two-and-a-half stars out of a possible five. Many people who heard of the story went on and left one-star ratings, castigating her for not taking care of the problem. Others, claiming to be customers of Dermott's, have left five-star reviews, urging those considering the business to pay attention to those from people who have used the business.

]]>angies listconsumer issuesdefamationdog trainingfirst amendmentlawsuitobedienceonline reviewspetsreview sitessuitvirginiayelpErik ShermanFri, 27 Mar 2015 11:27:00 EST5 Ways to Keep Your Bank Account From Being Lootedhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/on/keep-your-bank-account-safe/http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/keep-your-bank-account-safe/http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/keep-your-bank-account-safe/#commentsFiled under: Identity Theft, Banking, Consumer Protection, Ripoffs & Scams, Internet FraudS1001/ShutterstockIdentity theft is rampant and responsible for 13 percent of all consumer complaints to the Federal Trade Commission in 2014, according to an agency report. A quarter of these complaints were due to credit card or bank fraud.

Bank fraud is particularly painful. Criminals have a number of ways of attacking your assets, including altering checks you've written, counterfeiting checks or getting access to a debit card. Once money is pulled out of your account, you have to act quickly for the bank to accept a claim of fraud. A delay can mean the difference between recovering money or seeing it vanish for good.

Here are some actions you can take now to prevent looting or at least limit your losses.

1. Use Multiple Bank Accounts

If all your money is in one bank account and a thief gains access, the entire amount is available, as Shaun Murphy, CEO of yet-to-launch online privacy company PrivateGiant, pointed out to DailyFinance. A solution is to break up your holdings across multiple accounts: one for investments, one for savings, a retirement account, an emergency fun, and a regular checking account for bills. Although you may see more total fees, the divisions become firebreaks that keep someone from siphoning out everything.

2. Skip the Debit Card

Privacy and identify theft experts often suggest leaving the debit card at home and depending, instead, on a traditional credit card. The reason is the legal protections differ between the two types of payment cards. Credit cards are protected by the federal Fair Credit Billing Act. If you properly report problems, card issuers are responsible for all but $50 of losses, and many will voluntarily cover even the $50 if you can show the charges were fraudulent. Debit cards are treated like checks and come under the Electronic Funds Transfer Act. Money is already gone -- rather than a reduction of immediately available credit. Your personal loss is still limited to $50, but only if you report the problem within two days. Between two and 60 days, you're liable for $500. More than 60 days, and you're out of luck. Some banks will offer similar protections to credit cards, but the prudent approach is to use credit cards instead.

3. Embrace Strong Security

Multi-factor security, particularly when it involves receiving a texted code that you then have to enter, is inconvenient. But it's worth the slight annoyance. Unless a thief also has your phone, online access to your bank account becomes less likely. The harder it is for someone to break into your accounts, the less likely that they'll keep trying.

4. Never Click On an Email Link

Phishing schemes, where criminals send an email designed to look like it comes from your bank in hopes of your providing account names and passwords, are rampant. If you get a message about an alleged problem with your account, never click the links in the email. Instead, log into your account as you normally would and look for any communications. If you click on a provided link, chances are that you'll be directed to a fake site designed to capture your information for someone to later raid the account.

5. Check Your Accounts Regularly

The single most important step you can take is to regularly review your accounts for fraudulent activity -- not once a month, but every couple of days. Doing so should only take a minute or two. Log into your online banking system and scan the most recent activity. If something seems off, you can look into the details or even call the bank and be sure that you actually do recognize the transaction. If not, you've spotted the problem quickly enough to invoke the highest levels of legal protection available.

Pet owner Frank Lucido alleged that his family began feeding their three dogs exclusively on Beneful in late December or early January and that the animals were kept in separate houses because of some home construction. By the end of January, all three dogs had become seriously ill and one died. Two of the dogs showed bleeding in the stomach and liver lesions. The dead dog, an 8-year-old English bulldog, showed signs "consistent with poisoning," according to a veterinarian quoted in the lawsuit.

Jeff Cereghino, an attorney representing Lucido, emphasized to the Daily Beast that all three dogs ate the same food and were in different buildings. "So you take away the automatic assumption that the neighbor didn't like the dogs or whatever," he said. "He was feeding them Beneful at the start of this, and one got sick and died, the other two were very ill. And then he started doing a little research, and he realized the causal link, at least in his mind, was the food."

Liver, Kidney Issues

The website ConsumerAffairs shows close to 800 one-star ratings of Beneful out of a possible five stars. Many posted stories allege that dog owners saw their pets become ill and often die from what appeared to be liver and kidney failure.

"We believe the lawsuit is baseless, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves and our brand," a company representative said in a statement sent Wednesday to DailyFinance. "Beneful had two previous class action suits filed in recent years with similar baseless allegations, and both were dismissed by the courts."

The suit claims that propylene glycol and mycotoxins are potentially harmful substances that are in Beneful. Propylene glycol is "clear, colorless liquid with the consistency of syrup," according to manufacturer Dow Chemical. It is used in a wide variety of applications, including hydraulic fluids, automobile antifreeze and cosmetics, but is also approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a food additive.

Mycotoxins are substances produced by some types of fungi, according to the National Institutes of Health. They can be poisonous, but they are also used in a variety of drugs, including antibiotics. Some types of mycotoxins are associated with damage to liver and kidneys.

Last year, Nestle Purina PetCare was one of two companies that settled a class action lawsuit by creating a $6.5 million pet owner compensation fund, according to NBC News. The suit claimed that jerky treats caused illness and death in thousands of dogs.

Americans feel the most financially secure that they have in four years. But the good feelings stand in contrast to the reality that 37 percent are on the "edge of financial disaster", according to a statement by Bankrate.com Chief Financial Analyst Greg McBride.

A new Bankrate.com-commissioned poll of 1,003 adults with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points showed that when it came to financial basics, 37 percent of Americans had no net resources to deal with an emergency. Twenty-four percent had more credit card debt than they had emergency savings and another 13 percent had no savings. At least the latter had no credit card debt in addition.

Adults between the ages of 30 and 49 were in the worst shape, as 32 percent of them had more credit card debt than savings. Only 21 percent of those under 30 and 14 percent of people 65 and older had more debt than savings. Those same two groups tended to have more savings than debt.

The group most likely to have neither credit card debt nor savings was those with the lowest income. Of those making less than $30,000 a year, more than 20 percent had neither debt nor savings. Only 5 percent of those making at least $75,000 were in a similar situation.

When asked how they felt about the amount of savings they had compared to a year ago, 47 percent said the same, 22 percent said more comfortable, and 28 percent felt less comfortable. Among unemployed workers, a third felt less comfortable, compared to 25 percent of those with jobs. Thirty-seven percent of those making between $30,000 and $49,900 a year felt less comfortable versus 21 percent of those making $75,000 or more.

People Still Feel More Confident

And yet, the savings picture is actually an improvement and part of a more optimistic sense about financial security. Bankrate's financial security index reached, at 104.8, the highest level it has in its four-year history, beating a previous high in January. Any figure above 100 shows a sense of increased financial security over the past 12 months.

Twenty-four percent of respondents felt more secure in their jobs, 63 percent felt the same, and 12 percent felt less secure, with 1 percent either uncertain or refusing to answer. Fifty-two percent felt the same as they did 12 months ago about the amount of debt they had while 29 percent were more comfortable and only 17 percent were less comfortable. So even if savings were a little more negative, improvement in the debt picture apparently more than made up for it.

However, the picture is more strained for those between 50 and 64. As they near retirement age, 25 percent felt less comfortable with their amount of debt. That compares to 12 percent of millennials and 17 percent between 30 and 49.

Also, 28 percent of people said their net worth was higher, 56 percent said it was the same, and 13 percent described it as lower.

It's been a bitter winter for many, whether in Chicago, Boston and even parts of the South. Record-breaking cold snaps and amounts of snow and ice have played havoc, whether through traffic accidents or damage to roofs. The circumstances have made many become far more familiar with the insurance claims process than they might have liked.

Worse than navigating the bureaucracy of filing a claim is waiting for the money to do the necessary repairs. Given the increased pace of claims this year -- some insurance agencies have seen them jump by as much as ninefold, according to the Boston Globe -- the lines to get attention will be longer than ever. Here are some ways to speed the process.

Avoid the damage in the first place

Most damage from winter storms can be avoided with some advanced planning. For example, much of the house damage that happens in heavy snow regions isn't from the snow so much as from ice. In Boston, for example, where a 30-day period brought a record six feet of snow, according to Insurance Journal, most insurance claims are from water damage caused by ice dams. (For the uninitiated, layers of snow on roofs melt and then refreeze. That keeps water from draining and can force it under roofing, where it then leaks through ceilings.)

If such is your lot in life, plan on cleaning off your roof. Flat roofs may let you shovel, while you can use extensible roof rakes on sloped roofs, according to Travelers (TRV). Be careful about using ladders, as they can be dangerous when perched on snow and ice. No matter what your roof type, if in doubt, get a professional to do the work. It will cost, but not as much as extensive overhead damage.

Consider having trees trimmed near structures or cars. A limb weighted with snow and ice can come hurtling down and turn into a destructive force.

Be sure your car tires are in good shape. When there is a lot of snow and ice, consider getting snow tires and, if possible, stick to four-wheel or all-wheel drive vehicles. Also, drive with caution. Lower your speeds and recognize that piled-up snow can form walls that make seeing traffic more difficulty.

When bad things happen

You may not have been able to take all precautions or, even if you did, something might have gone wrong. MarketWatch had advice on how to speed claims approval:

File early. Homeowners may be slow in filing because they are uncertain if there's enough damage beyond a deductible to merit a claim. Let the insurance company or a public adjuster that you've hired make the initial determination. Waiting only puts you further down the line for attention, as other claims come in.

Have the right information. Have your insurance policy on hand so you know the limits and exclusions. Document the damage, including photos (if you have shots before the damage, so much the better) and a written description, purchase records, and any repair estimates. Not that the insurance company will automatically accept them, but it helps them get started.

Hire your own adjuster. An adjuster in the employ of the insurance company works for the insurer and is more likely to be biased toward the company. A public adjuster can help speed the process. However, you have to pay them, usually a portion of the settlement, so be sure the damage is high enough that any fee will be more than offset by the additional money the adjuster might be able to get. As MarketWatch reported, according to the Hurricane Law Group, a Florida firm that specializes in storm-related insurance issues, that probably means at least $25,000 in damage to a home.

Bring up mitigating factors. Insurance people aren't heartless. Unusual circumstances might get you bumped to the front of the line. For example, a family with a special needs child might find that temporary housing causes a problem for the child's care. But don't try to make something up. Just as an insurer can move things along to be helpful, they can also make your life more painful if they think you're trying to play them.

When hackers broke into systems of Anthem, a major health insurance company, earlier this month in a "very sophisticated" cyberattack, an estimated 80 million people suddenly became victims. The compromised information included names, birthdates, email address, employment details, Social Security numbers, incomes and street addresses, as The Associated Press reported.

Over the weeks, the implications of the action have continued to grow. As "Today" noted, the victims include tens of millions of children who are listed on their parents' insurance, putting the young people at a real risk of identity theft.

Criminals will use those stolen Social Security numbers to open accounts, get medical treatment, commit tax fraud, you name it.

"Criminals will use those stolen Social Security numbers to open accounts, get medical treatment, commit tax fraud, you name it," said Adam Levin, chairman and founder of IDentityTheft 911, to Today. Another expert was unaware of any other breach of this much personal data in history.

Children are at particular risk of identity theft because their information is more valuable to criminals. Because there is no history and typically no previous credit applications, it is far easier to fraudulently create identities. The criminals, who will likely have purchased the information from the original hackers, can use the identities whole or take the critical Social Security numbers and match them with other names and addresses, creating synthetic identities.

Because children have typically not yet applied for credit, there is no organic way for them or their parents to recognize that something wrong is happening. Particularly with synthetic identities, the families are unlikely to receive any notification that the Social Security numbers have been used. It can take years for the damage to come to light, usually when the victim comes of age, tries to apply for credit, and is turned down because of defaulted payments of the criminals.

In addition, medical identity theft is a burgeoning problem. Criminals use not only a Social Security number, but insurance numbers to gain treatment and leave the victim saddled with the bills and a health record that is no longer accurate because of the other person's information is now included. People may find care providers contacting them for payment of services provided, see a reduction of allowable benefits that were "used," and even receive incorrect medical diagnoses because of the unrelated information now included in the medical record.

The Identity Theft Resource Center offers a list of red flags that someone may have compromised the identity of their children. They include:

Collection agency calls or letters for the children.

Pre-approved credit card offers if the children never had bank accounts.

Notice to your child of a traffic violation warrant or notification of overdue taxes.

Denial of government benefits because the Social Security number is listed as having already received them.

Notification from the IRS that a dependent's name or Social Security number already appears on someone else's tax form.

According to Kiplinger, there are some steps the parents can take. Check credit reports of you and your children with all three credit reporting agencies: Experian, Equifax (EFX) and TransUnion. If your child is over 13, you can do this through the website AnnualCreditReport.com. If under 13, you'll need to make the request in writing, including such information as a certified copy of the birth certificate, a copy of the child's Social Security card, a copy of your driver's license, and a copy of a current utility bill with your current address.

Because it can take so long for identity theft to become obvious, you'll need to monitor the credit accords of a child for the foreseeable future. Consider putting a security freeze on the credit records at all three agencies so no one can apply for credit under the Social Security number without alerting someone. And keep watching the mail for bills, notifications, or anything else out of place addressed to the children.

Brand strength or power is based on goodwill of customers, staff, investors and others; investment in marketing; and the impact those factors have on business performance. Structured similar to a credit rating, AAA+ is the highest rank available.

Hit Movie Helped

Lego had a hot year in 2014. Not only does it appeal to adults as well as to both boys and girls, but "The Lego Movie" helped cement international attention. Amateurs make their own stop-action movies using the building blocks. The company passed on renewing an arrangement with Shell (RDS-A) after the arrangement brought substantial and biting criticism. Add partnerships with the likes of "Star Wars" and expansion of the brand into video games, and you have a name with power.

Ferrari, while still maintaining top brand value, slipped in the rankings from its No. 1 position last year. According to the report, a number of factors caused the change. The company's racing team has "struggled to mount a challenge" in Formula 1 racing.

Another view of brands is their estimated financial value. In that ranking, Apple (AAPL) continues its No. 1 spot at $128 billion, up 23 percent from its previous $105 billion. The power of Apple's name dwarfs that of the $82 billion that No. 2 Samsung, enjoys. Tech has a strong hold in this category, representing nine of the top 10 companies, including Google (GOOG), Microsoft (MSFT), Verizon (VZ), AT&T (T), Amazon (AMZN), General Electric (GE) and China Mobile. The only company not primarily in the tech space is Walmart (WMT), which could conceivably drop out of the top 10 next year, after being at the top in the past.

Every couple knows the story: One of them screws up big time and now owes an apology -- often punctuated by candy or flowers. Good thing for 1-800-Flowers that it's in the business of sending such products. Between reports of missed deliveries, wilted flowers and melted chocolates on Valentine's Day, the company is in the dog house for the foreseeable future.

1-800-Flowers (FLWS) apparently had a lot of problems getting deliveries right on Valentine's Day, according to BuzzFeed. Between deliveries that allegedly showed up late or not at all, wilted and otherwise damaged flowers, melted chocolates, and wrong orders, people were voicing their displeasure on Twitter and Facebook, keeping customer service people busy and competitors delighted. Here are just some of the examples:

And 1-800-Flowers did try to answer complaints online and, as CNN Money reported, some customers were promised a refund and a discount coupon for the future. But even in making good the company did badly in some cases.

It's a legacy gift of the U.S. domestic tax system and collective expertise in bending rules to make a buck. But it raises the question of whether U.S. taxpayers -- and international relations -- could be put at risk if the trades necessary for the arbitrage go badly.

The practice of dividend arbitrage has been around for decades. Countries typically impose a withholding tax on dividends paid by native companies to foreign shareholders. That amount typically runs 15 percent to 30 percent.

"Because of the withholding tax, we found that people would avoid high dividend-paying stocks in foreign countries because they knew it would have a drag on their performance," Susan Christoffersen, an associate professor of finance at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Finance, told DailyFinance.

A Hypothetical Example

Dividend arbitrage is a financial dance that moves stock ownership moved back and forth across borders to technically avoid withholding when it comes due. Large shareholders like mutual funds or hedge funds tend to use it. Here's an explanation from a 2005 paper (paid access), "Crossborder dividend taxation and the preferences of taxable and nontaxable investors: Evidence from Canada," that Christoffersen co-authored:

A hypothetical U.S. mutual fund, Taxwise International Fund, owns 100,000 shares of TransCanada Pipelines. TransCanada pays a 29 cents a share dividend to shareholders of record on June 30. Without arbitrage, Taxwise would receive $29,000 less 15 percent Canadian withholding for a total of $24,650.

Taxwise lends its shares to a U.S. arbitrageur, which shorts the shares with dividend to a Canadian arbitrageur. The U.S. arbitrageur makes the market interest on the short sale.

After the dividends are paid, the two arbitrageurs undertake a prearranged swap. The Canadian arbitrageur receives the market interest from the U.S. arbitrageur minus a discount, which the latter keeps. The U.S. arbitrageur receives the $24,650 plus any profit made on the difference between the purchase and sales prices of the shares.

The U.S. arbitrageur returns the shares to Taxwise along with the $24,650 and a lending fee. According to the study, Taxwise would have likely given up about 5 percent of the dividends rather than the 15 percent that withholding would have required.

The specifics and intricacies can vary, depending on the two countries involved. But because the arbitrage is a derivative that requires short selling and depends on market interest rates, it can potentially be risky.

Dividend Arbitrage Began in the U.S.

According to the Journal's report, Bank of America had begun to finance such deals through its U.S. unit -- Bank of America National Association, or BANA -- which also runs the company's domestic retail banking business. Effectively, Bank of America had exposed government-backed consumer deposits to possible risk should the trades run into problems.

Dividend arbitrage originated in the U.S., according to a DailyFinance interview with Steven Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The practice was largely curtailed in 2010 after congressional hearings, as foreign investors were using derivatives to avoid 30 percent withholding. However, that didn't stop its use elsewhere.

"Many other countries, including many European countries, have a tax framework similar to ours prior to 2010," Rosenthal said. Even if the mechanisms largely don't work for dividends paid by U.S. corporations to foreign investors, they are still available internationally. An Italian or American investor might use them to receive dividends from a German, for example.

Bank of America Says It 'No Longer' Does This

Bank of America told the Journal that BANA had not sustained any losses as a result of the activity and "no longer finances dividend-arbitrage activity." But were those any losses on an individual trade basis or net losses, which, if profitable enough, might hide individual losses? Also, according to the Journal, other parts of Bank of America outside the U.S. continue to offer such services.

"I think the real problem here is derivatives are inherently complicated," Rosenthal said. "I think there are steps to make sure banks are exercising proper diligence and steps to take to carve out the risk from federally insured deposits."

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act had a section that forced U.S. banks to spin off work in certain types of speculative ventures, including some derivatives, into a separate entity. The structure would have prevented consumer deposits from potentially being affected by risky trades that went badly and, therefore, invoking government insurance of those deposits to make good losses. That section was revoked as part of the $1.1 trillion spending bill passed and signed into law last December.

"I think Dodd-Frank did a good job," Rosenthal said. "But politically we haven't been able to hold the line and it's not clear where we're going to end up."

]]>arbitrageBank of Americabankingdividend arbitrageDodd-Frank Actfinancial reformgovernmentErik ShermanSat, 14 Feb 2015 06:00:00 ESTKeystone XL Votes, Big Oil Contributions Connectedhttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/02/12/keystone-xl-votes-big-oil-contributions-connected/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/02/12/keystone-xl-votes-big-oil-contributions-connected/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/02/12/keystone-xl-votes-big-oil-contributions-connected/#commentsFiled under: U.S. Government, Oil & Gas Industry, Barack ObamaMandel Ngan/AFP/Getty ImagesCathy McMorris Rodgers, a Republican representative from Washington, speaks during an event Wednesday supporting the Keystone XL pipeline.
Barack Obama has promised a veto on the bill that would enable construction of the Keystone XL pipeline without a presidential permit. Without enough support for an override in the House, let along the Senate, passage of the measure seems unlikely. Given the political calculus was clear at the start, you might wonder why so many Democrats as well as Republicans voted for the measure.

The answer may be money. Senators and representatives who voted for the measure received far more in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry than those who opposed it, according to an analysis by watchdog group MapLight.org. Working from public contribution data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics, the organization matched votes on the bill to the money received by members of Congress from the oil and gas industry.

House representatives who voted for the bill on average received 13 times more in oil and gas contributions ($45,375) than those who voted against it ($3,549). Democratic representatives who voted for the bill received, on the average, $18,141, roughly five times the $3,444 received by those who voted against the bill.

Refinery Operators Make Big Contributions

Senators voting for the bill got 10 times the amount, at an average $236,544, than those who voted against it ($22,882). Democratic senators who voted for the bill, even though Obama had indicated his opposition, received 3.2 times as much as the Democrats who voted against it ($73, 279 vs. $22,882). Sen. John Hoeven, the Republican from North Dakota who sponsored the legislation, received $275,998.

The contributions happened between Oct. 1, 2012 and Sept. 30, 2014. To say that more money caused the vote is not necessarily a foregone conclusion. It could be that the industry donated more heavily to candidates predisposed to support the bill. But the contributions did happen over a time that was of particular importance to political support of the bill.

Gulf Coast refinery operators have contributed heavily to generally lobbying Congress and federal agencies. Since Jan. 1, 2013, the following top five spent $58.8 million (although there is no way to know what percentage was focused on the pipeline question vs. other topics):

As the country sees a measles flare-up, some politicians seem to jump on the anti-vaccine bandwagon, as the Washington Post reports. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called for "some measure of choice" on vaccines by parents, while Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said that most vaccines should be voluntary. Both Republicans are expected to run for president in 2016.

Medical science says the evidence is clear that childhood vaccinations for such potentially dangerous diseases as measles, whooping cough and rubella are safe, with risks of protection far lower than the potential for permanent damage or even death the conditions can bring. And yet, a public debate on the subject -- often spearheaded by celebrity laypersons and promoted by various nonprofit organizations -- races on. Funding the organizations is a number of wealthy family foundations.

Media Campaign, Research Funded

The National Vaccine Information Center promotes concern about the risks of vaccinations through billboards, the giant Jumbotron display in Times Square and a film on Delta's (DAL) in-flight video network. Some of the money necessary came from the Dwoskin Family Foundation, set up by Alfred and Lisa Claire Dwoskin, which has donated $263,000 over time to the center, according to CNN Money.

From 2011 to 2013, the Dwoskins donated $950,000 to the University of British Columbia for research, at least some of which looked at potential links between aluminum in vaccines and neurological disorders. The couple's foundation put money into a film that suggested vaccines cause various childhood illnesses.

According to the foundation's website, it "has funded efforts focused on finding the root causes of immune, inflammatory and cognitive disorders in children and older adults."

This mission is based on the acknowledged significant increases of previously rare autoimmune and inflammatory diseases that have become prevalent since the 1980s. These diseases include a wide range of conditions varying from asthma to autism and age related neurological diseases such as Alzheimer's.

Barry Segal created the foundation Focus for Health, "dedicated to advocacy, education, investigation, and research that explores the autism epidemic and the causes of chronic illness." Focus for Health donated $171,000 to another family foundation advocacy group called Generation Rescue, this one started by Lisa and J.B. Handley and now headed by television personality and former Playboy model Jenny McCarthy.

Paper Retracted

According to CNN Money, Generation Rescue has helps support former British doctor Andrew Wakefield, a co-author of the now-discredited 1998 paper that claimed a link between the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and autism and set off the anti-vaccine movement. The Lancet, a leading medical journal that originally published the paper, eventually retracted it, and Wakefield lost his medical license.

Of course, nothing in science and medicine is simple, and there are significant unknowns. A recent study by Danish researchers suggests that 60 percent of the apparent increase in reports of autism spectrum disorder is due to "changes in diagnostic criteria and the inclusion of out-of-hospital diagnoses," according to CBS News. In 1994, diagnostic criteria changed the symptoms that are supposed to diagnose the disorder. That still leaves 40 percent of the causes of increased diagnoses unaccounted for, although there have been many studies that have refuted a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism, according to the Immunization Action Coalition, an organization that works closely with the Centers for Disease Control.

]]>anti vaccine movementautismchris christiefinancingmeasles vaccinationMMRMMR vaccinemoneymumpsRand PaulrubellavaccinationsvaccineErik ShermanFri, 06 Feb 2015 11:18:00 ESTIRS Says It Depends on Kennedy-Era Computinghttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/02/04/irs-kennedy-era-computers-process-tax-returns/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/02/04/irs-kennedy-era-computers-process-tax-returns/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/02/04/irs-kennedy-era-computers-process-tax-returns/#commentsFiled under: Technology, Taxes, U.S. Government, Income Tax, IRSYouTube
If dealing with federal income taxes have seemed a byzantine and painful process, there may be a reason. IRS Commissioner John Koskinen told the Senate on Tuesday the agency is woefully behind the times when it comes to computers and automation, according to a CNN Money report.

We're running applications we were running when John F. Kennedy was president.

"We're running applications we were running when John F. Kennedy was president," Koskinen said.

His statement was in response to questions from anything-but-friendly Senators who wanted to know why it took so long for victims of identity theft to get new tax identification numbers.

According to Koskinen, the IRS has computer systems that were customized in the 1950s and 1960s. More recently, the agency has been spending significant money trying to upgrade the Camelot-era systems.

The IRS budget request for fiscal year 2014, which ended last September, shows that the upgrade spending is hefty. In fiscal 2012, the IRS spent $1.8 billion on information systems. The number rose slightly for 2013 and the agency wanted $2.2 billion in 2014.

It's like driving a Model T that now has a great GPS system and wonderful sound system, [and] has a rebuilt engine," Koskinen said.

Your agency spends billions of dollars every year on information technology systems -- roughly twenty percent of its entire budget. Given this extraordinary amount, we question the efficiency in which IRS IT systems are procured, and we look forward to working with you in the coming months to find ways to spend this money in a manner that provides better value to taxpayers.

Some significant part of the cost is due to new tax laws and programs that Congress has told the IRS it must administer, Koskinen testified. For example, under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, the IRS must collect data from foreign-based financial institutions that have accounts held by U.S. citizens.

"We have 145,000 foreign financial institutions about to provide us data under [that act]," Koskinen said. "All of those systems had to be built and rebuilt to absorb that data."

"Taxpayer service has reached unacceptably low levels and is getting worse, creating compliance barriers and significant inconvenience for millions of taxpayers," a report from Olson's office stated. Only half of the projected 100 million taxpayer telephone calls it receives will actually be answered.

The irony is that in 1953, when it first was using computers, the IRS had to convince the public that it was a good idea. Here's a 10-minute video the agency created to calm taxpayer distrust.

What you see in a food ad may not be what you actually get but, rather, what the company wants you to think is available. For example, fast food gets its own food stylist before appearing in an ad. Finding exactly the right pickles, the best angle, the most flattering lighting, and carefully sculpting the drips of ketchup can make a burger go from flat disk to luscious dish.

Sometimes the company wants to sell something else. McDonald's (MCD) has a new campaign: Pay with Lovin', as MoneyTalkNews reports. A million customers will be picked at random up until Valentine's Day to pay for their orders with only a "random act of Lovin'," as the promotion rules explain. That might include fist bumping one of the employees, calling a loved one, blowing a kiss, or participating in a family group hug.

What McDonald's is selling here is a connection between the company and consumers, but that image is about as realistic as the doctored burger. Sales keep falling, as DailyFinance has previously reported, and Mickey D's is struggling to wipe away negative perceptions about its food and relevance. Previous attempts to do so by publicly discussing ingredients and methods of making products like Chicken Nuggets have backfired as the explanations were anything but appetizing, according to AOL Jobs.

An attempt to push brand shouldn't be surprising, as the company fired its previous CEO Don Thompson and installed Chief Brand Officer Steve Easterbrook as top executive, as the Associated Press reported last month. However, brand is tricky to promote. More than a veneer, it has to involve everything about a company to really work. Such a campaign can go wrong when some customers refuse to participate, as happened in Florida as reported by the Tampa Tribune. And as The Street notes, McDonald's needs to deliver more than hugs and fist bumps.

The problem is that once inside the restaurant, those same consumers may well be reminded of why they don't like McDonald's in the first place, such as the absence of healthy alternatives, slow lines, greasy-smelling restaurants and a huge menu that continues to be stuffed with classic calorie bombs.

The Lovin' campaign has the real possibility as coming across as a desperate quick-fix attempt by McDonald's to be loved by consumers when the chain is no longer part of cultural identity, as Vancouver Sun columnist Shelley Fralic pointed out.

Ask any five-year-old today who the Hamburglar is and you're likely to get a blank stare, as they scan their memory banks for the names of Lego characters, Skylander fighters, SpongeBob protagonists and Stampylongnose references that might offer a clue.

And that, in a nutshell, is the trouble with McDonald's.

McDonald's is no longer a cheap place to take the family and the same sums dropped on its burgers and fries might also buy a meal at any of a number of competitors. Kids don't have an association with going to golden arches and, so, grow up already disaffected.

GoDaddy got itself into another boatload of trouble over a Super Bowl ad last week, when it had to pull its lost puppy ad after angering animal rights groups. Heartwarming footage of a brave puppy finding its way home only to be told on arrival that the happy owner had just sold it online is not the stuff of charm or nostalgia.

Instead, the company ran a straightforward spot about small business owners. Variety raised the question of whether the entire string of events was another ploy to gain attention. The company had used risqué spots and pushed the boundaries of normal taste in the past as a way to gain mindshare and expand the business.

In one sense, it worked. GoDaddy is the largest registrar of Internet domains in the world. But a brief look at the company's SEC S-1 document, filed last year in anticipation of an eventual initial public offering that will likely happen this year, shows that a basic high-tech industry tenet doesn't always hold true. As GoDaddy has proven, increased bulk doesn't necessarily bring profitability.

Ready for an IPO?

Filing IPOs for high-tech companies that never once were profitable isn't new. The practice ran rampant during the dot-com boom and subsequent bust. The collapse largely scared off the practice for years, but it has seen resurgence of late. Box (BOX), for example, had put off its IPO last year. To do so, it had to bring in another large round of investment for enough cash to maintain operations. In January, Box finally had its public debut, with prices on its first day going from $14 to a $23.23 close, according to Fox Business.

In the red, these companies promise investors a bright future because of expected growth. Not only will increasing numbers drive up share prices, but eventually they will enable the business to invert the relative sizes of expenses and revenues to create profit. It worked for Amazon (AMZN) and Google (GOOG), right?

But GoDaddy is showing the limit of the theory. As the S-1 declares, "We operate the world's largest domain marketplace, where our customers can find that unique piece of digital real estate that perfectly matches their idea." Forget future scale. GoDaddy has already topped its industry and yet remains in the red.

It Started as Jomax in 1997

According to the most recent updated S-1, the company started as Jomax Technologies in 1997 and two years later changed the name to GoDaddy. It achieved positive cash flow by 2001, but not profitability. With Super Bowl ads going back to 2005, growth has been strong. Between 2009 and 2013, GoDaddy hit a bookings compound annual growth rate of 17 percent.

A shift in ownership and change in accounting happened in 2011, so the details of operations before then are unavailable. But in 2011, the company post more than $324 million on revenue of $894 million. In 2012, the net loss was $279 million on $910 million in revenue. The loss contracted sharply to roughly $200 million on $1.1 billion in revenue in 2013. The first nine months of 2014 showed $1 billion in revenue and $117 million net loss, compared to $825 million revenue and $134 million net loss in the same period of 2013.

The gap is closing, but that's after 17 years of business and, literally, becoming the largest company of its type in its industry. If that's not enough scale to see at least a few drops of black ink, what would be? Eventually a company needs to make more money than it spends. If that's not possible through growth, then one of two conditions is true. The business should control costs, rather than drive expansion, or management and investors should recognize that the company is not viable.

The old assumption that tech investors should take the growth view may be wrong. Perhaps what the industry and those who put money into it should consider is whether a company can build a solid business that can last. But that doesn't get the large jumps in stock price and an income means the old blue chip strategy of relying on dividends. It's a concept that remains foreign to the tech set.

]]>advertisingGoDaddyinvestingipomarketingnysesuper bowl adssuper bowl commercialsSuper Bowl XLIXtech stockswall streetErik ShermanMon, 02 Feb 2015 13:32:00 ESTForget the Super Bowl: Head Straight to the Commercialshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/01/30/forget-super-bowl-watch-commercials/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/01/30/forget-super-bowl-watch-commercials/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/01/30/forget-super-bowl-watch-commercials/#commentsFiled under: Advertising & Marketing, Sports, Music & EntertainmentYouTubeA Snickers Super Bowl ad substitutes Danny Trejo for "Marcia" of "The Brady Bunch."
Skipping the Super Bowl may seem un-American. But then, even with last year's massive average audience of 111.5 million, according to audience metrics company Nielsen, 65 percent of people in the U.S. choose to do something else.

Those who don't like football -- or maybe the New England Patriots or Seattle Seahawks draw their ire -- still might enjoy watching the commercials. As much an annual rite as the game, the Super Bowl commercials are the showcase for marketers who want to reach a massive audience and also prove how clever or funny they are. After all, come up with a killer ad, and a business captures media coverage and water cooler conversation for days, making the millions that companies spend on the spot look reasonable for the total amount of attention they get.

But how do you watch the commercials without sitting through every pass and punt? Luckily, you have a number of convenient options. Although some are after-the-game choices, they still free you up to watch this year's Puppy Bowl from Animal Planet.

Dish Network Lets You Automatically Skip the Play

TV distributors that provide ways to record programs and then automatically skip by the commercials have been the bane of marketers for years. Now Dish Network, in an attempt to reach an obvious audience of people who pass on football while trying to be a hero to advertisers, has turned the concept upside down in something it calls Reverse AutoHop. If you use Dish and have the PrimeTime Anywhere feature enabled for NBC before the game, you can record the whole event and, starting Monday, skip everything but the commercials.

Watch 15 Commercials Before the Game

Rolling Stone has collected 15 deliberately leaked Super Bowl commercials. You can see Katie Couric and Bryant Gumbel from 1994 confused about the Internet in a BMW spot; several offerings, both sentimental and humorous, from Budweiser (BUD); Kim Kardashian in a T-Mobile (TMUS) ad; and various offerings from Lexus, Victoria's Secret (LB), Wix.com, Dove, Mercedes-Benz, Kia, No More, Newcastle's threatened we're-going-to-feature-a-bunch-of-brands video, Eat24 and Carl's Jr.

And a Few More Pre-Game Features

IGN.com has its own set of leaked spots. You can get most of what Rolling Stone offers, plus an extended cut of the Carl's Jr. ad and others from Nationwide, Squarespace, WeatherTech, McDonald's (MCD), Friskies, a couple from Snickers (check the Brady Bunch one), Esurance with Lindsay Lohan, Toyota (TM), Mountain Dew, mophie, Pepsi (PEP), Sprint (S) and mobile game Heroes Charge.

Don't Forget the Movies

Upcoming films often use the Super Bowl as a massive launch platform. IGN has seven movie trailers that will wind up in between touchdowns and tackles.

Post-Game Roundup

The previews don't cover all the ads, according to the Advertising Age list of companies running spots. But a quick web search will show who has the whole list. IGN and Advertising Age are two likely sources, as are the major broadcast networks.

Lego Time

If all that isn't enough, you can tune in to the Brick Bowl. A+C Studios, an animation firm in the U.K., plans to "recreate some of the best of the halftime commercials as a stop-motion animated film, using thousands of Lego bricks, in less than 36 hours." This could be pretty amusing.